Association definitions

Question 1

Conspires

Answer 1

Conspires

Conspiracy is an agreement by two or more people to commit an offence.

Question 2

Omission

Answer 2

Omission
The agreement between the parties concerned may also have as its object an omission (failure to act) as opposed to the commission of an offence and as such this must not be overlooked.
Example – Security guard leaves a door unlocked that he usually secures (the omission) with the aim being that his associates gain entry to commit a burglary (the offence).

Question 3

Withdrawing from the agreement

Answer 3

Withdrawing from the agreement

A person withdrawing from the agreement is still guilty of conspiracy as are the people who become party to the agreement after it has been made. However, a person can effectively withdraw before the actual agreement is made.

Question 4

Completion of conspiracy

Answer 4

Completion of conspiracy

The offence is complete on the agreement being made with the required intent.

Question 5

Actus Reas Agreement requires physical and mental faculties

Answer 5

Actus Reas Agreement requires physical and mental faculties
The mens rea (mental intent) necessary for a conspiracy is:
An intention of those involved to agree AND
An intention that the relevant course of conduct should be pursued by those party to the agreement
The actus reus (physical element) of conspiracy is the agreement between two or more people to put their common design into effect. The agreement must be made before the commission of the acts.

Question 6

Mens Rea - conspiracy

Answer 6

Mens Rea - conspiracy

The offender’s mental intent must be to commit the full offence.

Question 7

Conspiring with a spouse

Answer 7

Conspiring with a spouse
S67 CA 1961 – A person is capable of conspiring with his or her spouse or civil union partner or with his or her spouse or civil union partner and any other person.

Question 8

Offence explained

Answer 8

Offence explained

Offence and crime are words that are used interchangeably in statute. May be described as any act or omission that is punishable on conviction under any enactment and are demarcated into four categories.

Question 9

Act and Omission Defined

Answer 9

Act and Omission Defined
Act – To take action or do something, to bring about a particular result.
Omission – The action of excluding or leaving out someone or something, a failure to fulfil a moral legal obligation.

Question 10

Conspiracy entered into overseas

Answer 10

Conspiracy entered into overseas

Under the common law rules as to jurisdiction over conspiracy offences a person who entered into conspiracy overseas is amenable to the jurisdiction of NZ courts only if they are later physically present in NZ and they act in continuance of the conspiracy.

Question 11

Conspiracy to commit an offence overseas (defence)

Answer 11

Conspiracy to commit an offence overseas (defence)

The person has a defence if they are able to prove that the act is not an offence under the law of the place where it was to be committed.

Question 12

Admissibility of evidence - conspiracy

Answer 12

Admissibility of evidence - conspiracy

Anything a conspirator or party to a joint charge says or does to further the common purpose is admissible against the others involved.

Question 13

Investigative procedure

Answer 13

Investigative procedure
Witnesses – Interview and obtain statements from witnesses covering:
The identity of the people present at the time of the agreement
With whom the agreement was made
What offence was planned
Any acts carried out to further the common purpose
Suspects – Interview the people concerned and obtained statements to establish:
The existence of an agreement to commit an offence OR
The existence of an agreement to omit or do something that would amount to an offence AND
The intent of those involved in the agreement
The identity of all people concerned where possible
Whether anything was written, said or done to further the common purpose

Question 14

Charging - conspiracy and substantive offence

Answer 14

Charging - conspiracy and substantive offence

Charges of conspiracy should not be filed in situations where the specific (substantive) offence can be proved.

Laying both a substantive charge and a related conspiracy charge is often undesirable because:

The evidence admissible only on the conspiracy charge may have a prejudicial effect in relation to the other charges

The judge may disallow the evidence as it will be too prejudicial

The addition of a conspiracy charge may unnecessarily complicate and prolong a trial

Where the charge of conspiracy is not founded on evidence or is an abuse of process. It may be quashed
Severance may be ordered.

Question 15

Attempts

Answer 15

Attempts – Section 72(1) CA 1961
Having an intent to commit an offence, does or omits an act for the purpose of accomplishing his object, is guilty of an attempt to commit the offence intended, whether in the circumstances it was possible to commit the offence or not.

Question 16

Three elements of an attempt offence

Answer 16

Three elements of an attempt offence
Intent (mens rea) – to commit an offence
Act (Actus reus) – that they did, or omitted to do, something to achieve that end
Proximity – that their act or omission was sufficiently close

Question 17

Intent must be established - attempt

Answer 17

Intent must be established - attempt

When proving an attempt to commit an offence it must be shown that the accused’s intention was to commit the substantive offence.

Question 18

Acts must be sufficiently proximate to the full offence

Answer 18

Acts must be sufficiently proximate to the full offence
The accused must have started to commit the full offence and have gone beyond the phase of mere preparation. This is the “all but” rule.

Question 19

The test for proximity

Answer 19

The test for proximity

Simister and Brookbanks suggest the following questions should be asked in determining the point at which an act of mere preparation may become an attempt:

Has the offender done anything more than getting himself into a position from which he could embark on actual attempt OR

Has the offender actually commenced execution; that is to say, has he taken a step in the actual crime itself?

Question 20

Impossibility

Answer 20

Impossibility

This means a person can be convicted of an offence that was physically impossible to commit, but cannot be convicted of an offence that was legally impossible to commit.

Question 21

When an act is physically or factually impossible

Answer 21

When an act is physically or factually impossible

If the act in question amounts to an offence, but the suspect is unable to commit it due to interruption, ineptitude or any other circumstances beyond their control.

Question 22

Act completed sufficiently proximate to intended offence - no defence

Answer 22

Act completed sufficiently proximate to intended offence - no defence

Once the acts are sufficiently proximate, the defendant has no defence that they:

Were prevented by some outside agent

Failed to complete the full offence due to ineptitude, inefficiency or insufficient means

Were prevented from committing the offence because an intervening event made it physically impossible

Question 23

Attempt to commit an attempt

Answer 23

Attempt to commit an attempt

No such thing as an attempt to commit an attempt.

Question 24

Function of the judge and jury - attempt

Answer 24

Function of the judge and jury - attempt
Judge - The judge must decide whether the defendant had left the preparation stage and was already trying to effect completion of the full offence.
Jury – The jury must the decide whether the facts presented by the Crown have been proved beyond reasonable doubt and, if so, must decide whether the Defendant’s acts are close enough to the full offence.

Question 25

Unable to charge with attempt

Answer 25

Unable to charge with attempt The criminality depends on recklessness or negligence An attempt to commit an offence is included within the definition of that offence The offence is such that the act has to have been completed in order for the offence to exist at all

Question 26

Penalties - attempts

Answer 26

``` Penalties - attempts Section 311(1) – Crimes Act 1961 ``` If the full offence carries life imprisonment – 10 years Any other offence – Half of the full offence

Question 27

What you need to prove parties to an offence

Answer 27

What you need to prove You must prove: The identity of the Defendant AND An offence has been successfully committed AND The elements of the offence s66(1) have been satisfied

Question 28

To be considered a party to, when does participation have to occur? (before or during)

Answer 28

To be considered a party to, when does participation have to occur? To be considered a party to the offence, participation must have occurred before or during the commission of the offence and before the completion of the offence.

Question 29

Multiple offenders - parties to offences

Answer 29

Multiple offenders - parties to offences Two methods which multiple offenders may be considered to be the principle. Method 1 – Each offender satisfies elements of offence committed. Each of the principal offenders may, separately satisfy the necessary elements of the relevant offence committed. (ie – assault) Method 2 – Each offender separately satisfies part of the actus reus. Under section 66(1)(a) each offender may separately satisfy some part of the actus reus of the offence, where their actions, when combined with the actions of the other person, satisfy the complete actus reus. (ie. Brew poison, hand to another, who administers it)

Question 30

What are main points in R v Renata - parties to offences

Answer 30

What are main points in R v Renata - parties to offences - Each offender satisfies the ingredients of the offence committed - Each offender separately satisfies the actus reus

Question 31

Aids

Answer 31

Aids To aid means to assist in the commission of the offence, either physically or by giving advice and information. (Not required at the scene)

Question 32

Examples of assistance - parties to offences

Answer 32

Examples of assistance - parties to offences - Keeping lookout for someone committing a burglary - Providing a screwdriver to someone interfering with a motor vehicle - Telling an associate when a neighbour is away from their home so as to allow the opportunity to commit a burglary

Question 33

Abets

Answer 33

Abets | Abets means to instigate or encourage, that is, to urge another person to commit the offence.

Question 34

Incites

Answer 34

Incites | To incite means to rouse, stir up, stimulate, animate, urge or spur on a person to commit the offence.

Question 35

Counsels

Answer 35

Counsels Counsels means to intentionally instigate the offence by advising a person(s) on how best to commit an offence.

Question 36

Procures - parties to offences

Answer 36

Procures - parties to offences Procurement is setting out to see that something happens and taking the appropriate steps to ensure that it does. Procures requires that the secondary party deliberately causes the principal party to commit the offence.

Question 37

Common Intention parties to offences

Answer 37

Common Intention - parties to offences Can also be charged as parties to any other offence that any one of them commits in order to assist in the commission of the first offence originally agreed to, provided that the other offence is known to be a probable consequence of the prosecution of their common purpose.

Question 38

Innocent agents - parties to offences

Answer 38

Innocent agents - parties to offences An innocent agent is someone who is unaware of the significance of their actions. (Poison in glass, handed to waiter to deliver – Waiter does not know about poison therefore innocent agent.)

Question 39

Situations that establish involvement of parties - ROSWI

Answer 39

Situations that establish involvement of parties - ROSWI A reconstruction of the offence committed. This would indicate that more than one person was involved or that the principal offender had received advice or assistance. The principal offender acknowledging or admitting that others were involved in the offence. A suspect or witness admitting to providing aid or assistance when interviewed. A witness providing you with evidence of another person’s involvement based on their observations. Receiving information indicating that others were involved in the offence.

Question 40

Penalties – s311(2) CA 1961

Answer 40

Penalties – s311(2) CA 1961 | Same punishment as if he had attempted to commit that offence.

Question 41

Knowing - accessory after the fact

Answer 41

Knowing - accessory after the fact The accused must have knowledge that the person that they are being an accessory to was party to an offence at the time of assisting them. Simester and Brookbanks Knowing means knowing or correctly believing. The belief must be a correct one, where the belief is wrong a person cannot know something.

Question 42

Person

Answer 42

Person | Gender neutral. Proven by judicial notice or circumstantially.

Question 43

Offence

Answer 43

Offence | Any act or omission that is punishable on conviction under any enactment and are demarcated into four categories.

Question 44

Proof of the principal crime - accessory after the fact

Answer 44

Proof of the principal crime - accessory after the fact A person charged with being an accessory after the fact is entitled to insist on proof of the principal crime and to challenge the evidence of it even if the principal offender has pleaded guilty.

Question 45

Receives/Comforts or Assists

Answer 45

Receives/Comforts or Assists The accessory does a deliberate act for the purpose of assisting the offender to evade justice. The act done must actually help the person in some way.

Question 46

Tampers with/Actively suppresses evidence

Answer 46

Tampers with/Actively suppresses evidence Must do a deliberate act in relation to evidence against the offender for the purpose of assisting the person to evade justice. The act must actually help the person.

Question 47

Specifically assisted - accessory after the fact

Answer 47

Specifically assisted - accessory after the fact The act must have specifically assisted the offender after they had been arrested.

Question 48

Evades justice - accessory after the fact

Answer 48

Evades justice - accessory after the fact All acts must be done by the accessory with the express intention that the person evades justice either by avoiding arrest or conviction.

Question 49

What needs to be proved - accessory after the fact

Answer 49

What needs to be proved That the person (A), who is received, comforted or assisted by the accessory (B) is a party to an offence that has been committed. That, at the time of receiving, comforting, or assisting that person (A) the accessory (B) knows that person (A) was a party to the offence. That the accessory (B) received, comforted, or assisted that person (A) or tampered with or actively suppressed any evidence against that person (A). That, at the time of the receiving, comforting or assisting, the accessory’s (B) purpose was to enable that person (A) to escape after arrest or avoid arrest or conviction.

Question 50

Knowledge must exist at the time of assistance - accessory after the fact

Answer 50

Knowledge must exist at the time of assistance - accessory after the fact The accessory must possess the knowledge that: An offence has been committed AND The person they are assisting was a party to that offence

Question 51

Actus reus of an accessory after the fact

Answer 51

Actus reus of an accessory after the fact Accessory must do a deliberate intentional act. The deliberate intentional acts are: ``` Receives Comforts Assists Tampers with evidence Actively suppresses evidence ```

Question 52

Receiving or comforting an offender

Answer 52

Receiving or comforting an offender Harbouring an offender or offering them shelter can be considered receiving and/or comforting.

Question 53

Comforting an offender

Answer 53

Comforting an offender Comforting encompasses situations where an accessory provides an offender with things such as food and clothing.

Question 54

An accessory’s intent

Answer 54

``` An accessory’s intent To enable the offender to: Escape after arrest OR Avoid arrest OR Avoid conviction ```

Question 55

Acquittal of the offender(A) - accessory after the fact

Answer 55

Acquittal of the offender- accessory after the fact A person can still be convicted as an accessory after the fact despite the offender having been acquitted of the offence unless it is inconsistent.

Question 56

Witness

Answer 56

Witness A witness is a person who gives evidence and is able to be cross-examined in a proceeding.

Question 57

Assertion

Answer 57

Assertion This is something declared or stated positively.

Question 58

Matter of fact

Answer 58

Matter of fact A fact is a thing done, an actual occurrence or event.

Question 59

Opinion – s4 Evidence Act 2006

Answer 59

Opinion – s4 Evidence Act 2006 Opinion, in relation to a statement offered in evidence, means a statement of opinion that tends to prove or disprove a fact.

Question 60

Belief

Answer 60

Belief A belief is essentially a subjective feeling regarding the validity of an idea or set of facts.

Question 61

Judicial Proceeding

Answer 61

Judicial Proceeding Includes giving evidence by audio-visual link from another location (whether overseas or within NZ) This means that giving of false evidence by such a method from another country would equate to perjury in NZ and falls within the NZ jurisdiction.

Question 62

Oath - perjury

Answer 62

Oath - perjury This is a declaration before a person who has authority to administer an oath, which invokes some religious belief and says that a thing is true or right.

Question 63

When is perjury complete?

Answer 63

When is perjury complete? The offence of perjury is complete at the time the false evidence is given accompanied by an intention to mislead the tribunal.

Question 64

Evidence of perjury, false oath or false statement – s112, CA 1961

Answer 64

Evidence of perjury, false oath or false statement – s112, CA 1961 No one shall be convicted of perjury, on the evidence of one witness only, unless the evidence of that witness is corroborated in some material particular.

Question 65

Fabricating evidence – s113, CA 1961 - perjury

Answer 65

Fabricating evidence – s113, CA 1961 - perjury With intent to mislead any tribunal holding any judicial proceeding to which section 108 applies, fabricates evidence by any means other than perjury.

Question 66

Opinion evidence by lay witnesses – s24, Evidence Act 2006

Answer 66

Opinion evidence by lay witnesses – s24, Evidence Act 2006 A witness may state an opinion in evidence in a proceeding if that opinion is necessary to enable the witness to communicate, or the fact-finder to understand, what the witness saw, heard or otherwise perceived. Under this section, lay witnesses are routinely permitted to give evidence concerning apparent age, identity, speed, physical and emotional state of people, condition of articles and whether a person is under the influence of drink.

Question 67

In relation to the offence of Perjury, what intent is required?

Answer 67

In relation to the offence of Perjury, what intent is required? Intent to mislead – The offence of perjury is complete at the time the false evidence is given accompanied by an intention to mislead the tribunal. Where this intention is absent, no offence is committed.

Question 68

Giving evidence - three defined ways

Answer 68

Giving evidence - three defined ways To give evidence means to give evidence in a proceeding, in one of three defined ways: - In the ordinary way as described in s83 (personally in court or by affidavit) OR - In an alternative way, as provided for by s105 (AVL, DVD, SCREEN, ETC) OR - In any other way provided for under this Act or any other enactment

Question 69

Examples of misleading justice - perjury

Answer 69

Examples of misleading justice - perjury - Wilfully going absent as a witness - Preventing a witness from testifying - Arranging a false alibi - Threatening or bribing witnesses - Threatening or bribing jury members

Question 70

Receiving – s246(3) CA 1961, when the act is complete

Answer 70

Receiving – s246(3) CA 1961, when the act is complete Receiving is complete as soon as the offender has, either exclusively or jointly with the thief or any other person, possession of, or control over, the property or helps in concealing or disposing of the property.

Question 71

Possession

Answer 71

Possession | Possession may be actual or potential.

Question 72

Actual Possession

Answer 72

Actual Possession | Actual possession arises where the thing is question is in a person’s physical custody or control.

Question 73

Potential Possession

Answer 73

Potential Possession | Potential possession arises when the person has the potential to have the thing in question in their control.

Question 74

Property – s.2 CA 61

Answer 74

Property – s.2 CA 61 Property includes real or personal property and any estate or interest in any real or personal property, money, electricity and any debt and any thing in action and any other right or interest.

Question 75

Stolen (Theft – s219(1)(a) CA 61)

Answer 75

Stolen (Theft – s219(1)(a) CA 61) Dishonestly and without claim of right, taking any property with intent to deprive any owner permanently of that property or of any interest in that property.

Question 76

Obtains – s217 CA 1961

Answer 76

Obtains – s217 CA 1961 Means obtains or retains for himself or herself or for any other person.

Question 77

An imprisonable offence – s5 Criminal Procedures Act 2011

Answer 77

An imprisonable offence – s5 Criminal Procedures Act 2011 Imprisonable offence, in the case of any individual, means an offence punishable by imprisonment for life or by a term of imprisonment.

Question 78

Value - s.247 CA 61 - punishment of receiving

Answer 78

Value - s.247 CA 61 - punishment of receiving The property value is essential to the sentence as per section 247, CA 1961.

Question 79

Penalties - s.247 CA 61

Answer 79

Penalties - s.247 CA 61 Does not exceed $500 – (3 months) Exceeds $500 – but does not exceed $1000 (1 years) Exceeds $1000 (7 years)

Question 80

The “Act of receiving” – 3 elements

Answer 80

The “Act of receiving” – 3 elements There must be property which has been stolen or has been obtained by an imprisonable offence The Defendant must have “received” that property, which requires that the receiving must be from another (you cannot receive from yourself) The Defendant must receive that property in the knowledge that it has been stolen or illegally obtained, or being reckless as to that possibility. When the act is complete – section 246(3) Crimes Act 1961

Question 81

Concept of title

Answer 81

Concept of title Title is defined by the Oxford Dictionary as meaning a right or claim to the ownership of property. Title or ownership of a thing is the legal right to possession of that thing. Where property is obtained by deceptive means, the offender gains both possession and title however where the property is stolen, no title is gained by the offender.

Question 82

Voidable Title

Answer 82

Voidable Title Title obtained by deception is referred to as “voidable title.” This means the title can be avoided by the complainant. Until the title is avoided, the person committing the deception has title to the property concerned and is able to confer a good title to anyone who subsequently acquires the property from him in good faith.

Question 83

Avoiding title

Answer 83

Avoiding title Communicate directly with the deceiver Take all reasonable and possible steps to bring it to the deceiver’s notice eg sending a letter or email Advise the Police of the circumstances of the deception

Question 84

Circumstantial Evidence of guilty knowledge - receiving

Answer 84

Circumstantial Evidence of guilty knowledge - receiving - Possession of recently stolen property - Purchase at gross undervalue - Removal of identifying features or marks - Mode of payment - Receipt of goods at an unusual time / place / way - Lack of original packaging - type of person goods received from - concealment of property to avoid discovery

Question 85

Doctrine of recent possession

Answer 85

Doctrine of recent possession It is the presumption that, where the Defendant acquired possession willingly, the proof of possession by the defendant of property recently stolen in, in the absence of a satisfactory explanation, evidence to justify a belief and finding that the possessor is either the thief or receiver, or has committed some other offence associated with the theft of the property, eg burglary or robbery.

Question 86

Money Laundering

Answer 86

Money Laundering Money laundering – s243 Crimes Act 1961 For the purpose of this section and sections 244 and 245 – Is the process of dealing with the proceeds of criminal activity in such a way as to make the proceeds appear to have been legitimately acquired.

Question 87

Conceal – in relation to property, means to conceal or disguise the property and includes without limitations:

Answer 87

Conceal – in relation to property, means to conceal or disguise the property and includes without limitations: - To convert the property from one form to another - To conceal or disguise the nature, source, location, disposition or ownership of the property or of any interest in the property

Question 88

Deal with – in relation to property, means to deal with the property in any manner and by any means, and includes, without limitations:

Answer 88

Deal with – in relation to property, means to deal with the property in any manner and by any means, and includes, without limitations: - To dispose of the property, whether by sale, purchase, gift or otherwise - To transfer possession of the property - To bring the property into NZ - To remove the property from NZ

Question 89

Interest – in relation to property means:

Answer 89

Interest – in relation to property means: A legal or equitable estate or interest in the property OR A right, power, or privilege in connection with the property

Question 90

Offence - money laundering definition

Answer 90

Offence – Means an offence that is punishable under NZ law, including any act, wherever committed, that would be an offence in NZ if committed in NZ.

Question 91

Section 243(2) Crimes Act 1961 – 7 years

Answer 91

Section 243(2) Crimes Act 1961 – 7 years In respect of any property that is the proceeds of an offence, engages in money laundering transaction, knowing or believing that all or part of the property is the proceeds of an offence or being reckless as to whether or not the property is proceeds of an offence.

Question 92

Elements of section 243(2) CA 1961

Answer 92

Elements of section 243(2) CA 1961 - In respect of any property that is the proceeds of an offence - Engages in a money laundering transaction Knowing OR - Believing that all or part of the property is the proceeds of an offence OR - Being reckless as to whether or not the property is the proceeds of an offence.

Question 93

Placement

Answer 93

Placement – Cash enters the financial system – offender makes money from selling cannabis and deposit it into an associate’s account

Question 94

Layering

Answer 94

Layering – Money is involved in a number of transactions. – the associate transfers money into an account held by a shell company that the offender is the director of.

Question 95

Integration

Answer 95

Integration – Money is mixed with lawful funds or integrated back into the economy, with the appearance of legitimacy. – money is declared as revenue for the company, tax is paid and then offender pays himself director fees or a salary out of the account

Question 96

Section 3(1) & (2) Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009

Answer 96

Section 3(1) Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 The primary purpose of this Act is to establish a regime for the forfeiture of property – That has been deprived directly or indirectly from significant criminal activity OR That represents the value of a person’s unlawfully derived income. (2) The Criminal proceeds and instruments forfeiture regime established under this Act proposes to : Eliminate the chance for person to profit from undertaking or being associated with significant criminal activity; and Deter significant criminal activity; and Reduce the ability of criminals and persons associated with crime to continue or expand criminal enterprise; and Deal with matters associated with foreign restraining orders and foreign forfeiture orders that arise in NZ

Question 97

Tainted Property – s5 Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009

Answer 97

Tainted Property – s5 Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 Means any property that has, wholly or in part, been – Acquired as a result of significant criminal activity OR Directly or indirectly derived from significant criminal activity AND Includes any property that has been acquired as a result of, or directly or indirectly derived from, more than 1 activity if at least 1 of those activities is a significant criminal activity.

Question 98

Significant Criminal Activity – s6 Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009

Answer 98

Significant Criminal Activity – s6 Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, significant criminal activity means an activity engaged in by a person that if proceeded against as criminal offence would amount to offending – That consists of, or includes 1 or more offences punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of 5 years or more OR From which property, proceeds, or benefits of a value of $30,000 or more have, directly or indirectly, been acquired or deprived.

Question 99

Unlawfully benefited from criminal activity – s7 Criminal Proceeds (recovery) Act 2009

Answer 99

Unlawfully benefited from criminal activity – s7 Criminal Proceeds (recovery) Act 2009 In this act, unless the context otherwise requires, a person has unlawfully benefited from significant criminal activity if the person has knowingly directly or indirectly, derived a benefit from significant criminal activity (Whether or not that person undertook or was involved in the significant criminal activity.)

Question 100

Profit forfeiture order – s55 Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009

Answer 100

Profit forfeiture order – s55 Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 The High Court must make a profit forfeiture order if it is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that – The respondent has unlawfully benefited from significant criminal activity within the relevant period of criminal activity AND The respondent has interests in property

Question 101

Case study – Unlawfully benefited from criminal activity – Pulman v Commissioner of Police

Answer 101

Case study – Unlawfully benefited from criminal activity – Pulman v Commissioner of Police The Court held that the purpose of the forfeiture regime was not only to prevent the ability of a person to actually profit from undertaking significant criminal activity but also the “chance” that they may be able to do so and also to deter significant criminal activity.

Question 102

Assessment process before preparing an application for a restraining order

Answer 102

Assessment process before preparing an application for a restraining order Before preparing such an application an assessment process is required. The assessment process is conducted to determine: The value of the asset Equity in the asset Any third-party interest in the asset The cost of action in respect of the asset

Question 103

What must occur before criminal proceeds can be taken

Answer 103

What must occur before criminal proceeds can be taken A restraining order is first step in the asset seizure process. In the case of tainted property and benefits from crime an application made to the High Court must show reasonable grounds for belief that the property is tainted – that it has been acquired, or directly or indirectly, derived from “significant criminal activity.”

Question 104

How long is a restraining order valid for?

Answer 104

How long is a restraining order valid for? | One year from the date on which the order is made.

Question 105

Who can apply for a restraining order?

Answer 105

Who can apply for a restraining order? Only members of Asset Recovery Units may apply for restraining orders.

Question 106

Points you should cover when interviewing a money laundering suspect

Answer 106

Points you should cover when interviewing a money laundering suspect Suspects legitimate income Suspects illegitimate income Expenditure Assets Liabilities